Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

Well,after seeing theories of many people,I created my own theory too!

Spoiler for The fantasy of umineko:

My theory is the explosion is a 'must' to make golden land truly exist.When the explosion occur,the conscious(hearts) of the people on the island had somehow being spreading through into sea of kakera.And with this the weird world of umineko were born.Sea of kakera can be influenced by reality 's perseptive and make the kakera that being observed into the truth.So,many thought can access into the sea of kakera

Spoiler for The magical explosion:

The explosion is a space-time portal that let the soul scatter into sea of kakera and slowly all the soul reformed into many things like:
Battler is a collective conscious of the 'fool' who doesn't know of the truth of the incident as he always can't grasp the true personality of uroshimiya family member and servant(he is out for 6 years!)while Beatrice is the 'world' which know all the truth.
Because their hearts become unstable after crossing so much kakera,so there are different personality within one people(example:Rosa,a good mother and bad mother.Eva,dedication to family and desire to head of ushromiya.Yasu/shannon/kanon,witch,lover boy/girl.Kyrie,a cool and cruel person,you get my idea)So,when the hearts goes into one of the kakera,stronger personality of each people will take control and weave different story and episode.But all the story must end in Explosion in order to connect the thought and hearts.So,it is impossible to have happy ending as Bern say...

Spoiler for Witch 's discovery:

And unfortunately,this phenomena had been observed by the witches of certainty and miracle,the voyager of kakera.So,Lamda lent power to Beato (power to maintain the certainty of a kakera)to let her weave story as she like and try to make Bern play with her for eternity.And of course,Bern will help Battler to figure out the truth.And then,the gameboard of witches begins.

Spoiler for Role and personification:

Then there is Erika,personification of a possible survivor and chances to take a glimpse into the cat box.So,she is trying to expose the truth to make the miracle of her surviving become possible and Bern would help her revive.
Dlanor is personification of human 's logic enforcement and deny the possibility of magic and enforce the mystery of Rokkenjima.She is helping Erika to reach the mystery truth.
The witch of theater-going,Aurora is a witch ALMOST having the same power as creator.I think she doesn't have a true form and she is just borrowing the image from 'certain someone' that we know.She want to ease from her boredom and she also discover the gameboard that Bern and Lamda is playing.So,she also involve herself in the game.
Lion is another possibility that Bern brought into the game from another Kakera(bigger cat box) that Beato couldn't reach.Well,she is the witch of miracle,so she can access more kakera than Beato.And in EP8,because his/her existence had been visualize in golden land ,he/she can also assisting in defending golden land.Will make it possible
Will,is a personification of hoping a happy ending in mystery(like all of us),are being brought in and the happy ending dreams being crushed by Bern(Damn you,Bern!!)Like Lion,his existence also being confirmed and can protect golden land.
The goats is human's collective conscious of human and didn't have a proper form(human figure)because they didn't have a proper goal and theory to deduce.In EP2 and 4,the goats are being shown as believe witch 's existance.But as human begin thinking in logic,the goats are try to devour the kakera that had proper truth(cat box) and attack the golden land.
Ange are also brought in with her death by Bern.Ange,as the sole survivor can see truth(kakera) of the worlds,she can send her hearts to other kakera and hoping a satisfied ending and truth.Battler who had reach the truth try to make Ange 's swaying hearts/soul move forward into the future and don't look back to the kakera to avoid eternal pain..

In the kakera that Battler live,he receive the thought of his own soul that had gone through all the EP and finally found the way to the golden land(place to rest in peace after gone through all the EP) that everyone 's soul gathered..

Not exactly, it was entirely Kinzo's choice to murder everyone in the military base, kidnap Beatrice, and steal the gold.

We don't know he did that at all. He calls his commander insane for thinking about that. I don't think we'll get an answer either.

Quote:

The man was forty years old at the time and an excellent marksman. There's no way he acted in the manner that he presented himself in the story.

In order: So are those "Elite Italian Soldiers", he has no combat experience, he's not supposed to be able to lie about his perspective under theatergoing authority, so he shouldn't be able to present himself falsely. Nobody else seems to be implied to.

And if he can lie under it what's the point of introducing it? That makes it pretty useless.

You know, I'm sure this had been brought up before, but I got to thinking lately, and the only conclusion I can really come to about Umineko, after everything's said and done is that the the true culprit of the Rokkenjima Incident is Kinzo.

After all, wasn't he the one that made all of this possible in the first place?

One may as well blame the United States for giving Kinzo the opportunity to buy the island. Then we have to blame Imperial Japan for attacking the United States. Then we have to blame British and Russian imperialism for driving Japan into aggressive imperialism to counteract western influences in Asia. And so on and so forth to the beginning of time.

The person "responsible" is the person that actually caused the deaths, however that happened to play out. Nobody else.

Imagine for a moment that the gold didn't exist, the bomb didn't exist, none of that stuff about Kinzo was true. But he does have a gun collection. Now imagine somebody gets one of his guns and kills everybody. Is it "Kinzo's fault" that the deaths occurred, because he owned the gun that was used to cause them? Certainly, but for the gun being there everybody wouldn't have been shot, but there's no telling what other weapon the killer might've used if he or she couldn't get a gun.

If Kinzo premeditated the inevitable circumstances that led to people killing, sure, we can point the finger at him. That's putting a lot of responsibility on a seemingly dead man, though.

The person who would receive blame for this situation in the public is the person who currently owns the property. And no matter how you look at it by purposes of ownership that isn't Kinzo. Dead or not because of the epitaph being solved it's more likely Yasu or Krauss, and only because Yasu hands it over to him without him knowing. This is also why people in 1998 are blaming Eva isn't it? "She inherited everything. She took all the property and made loads of money. Therefore she must be the suspicious person responsible for those grizzly murders they talk about in magazines and talk shows, and the accident." Is how it goes?

See how this logic works? Blaming Kinzo for this works the same way as what people are blaming Eva for in 1998.

I really don't see it that way, I don't think we agree on the seriousness of owning an undeclared amount of explosive and on setting it up in a way that any idiot could blow it creating the largest man-made crater in the world.

There's been a man in my country that was responsible for leaving several bombs around in public places. Note that they didn't have any timer, so someone actually needed to trigger them to make them explode. In no case this man was the one that actually made the bombs explode. The bombs were hidden in mundane objects and left in public places so you could say that he "dropped them" and therefore wasn't the owner anymore.

A grandfather clock seems mundane enough to me. I guess it could be different if it was some huge device with several switches to be pressed and a huge warning saying "danger! self-destruct system".

No matter how you look at it, the creation of that device alone deserves a lifetime imprisonment.

Read the 'tearing out the guts' scene again. Stealing the gold was Kinzo's idea.

And I deny that particular screenshot based on the spectator's authority. Which is why I said I don't beleive we will get a real answer. Besides I kind of prefer Episode 8's Kinzo.

Quote:

Spectator's Authority seems to force the subject to reveal what it THINKS is true. Kinzo is eighty years old and has deluded himself into thinking he's better than he is.

The way his commander is portrayed as being appalled in that scene vs what he says about him makes the story into a complete falshood not just a justification. Not to mention Kinzo is a grunt as well why should they listen to him?

I dunno. I actually prefer ijriims idea for this part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

I really don't see it that way, I don't think we agree on the seriousness of owning an undeclared amount of explosive and on setting it up in a way that any idiot could blow it creating the largest man-made crater in the world.

I don't think we disagree on that. I think I was just rambling about something that popped in my head.

But you know we're basically told the Japanese military left those there aren't we? The blame can be spread around.

But suppose that the whole bomb and the fancy clock switch are true. And suppose that the switch was turned on by mistake.

Who would you blame?

No one; it's an accident. You said so yourself, it was a mistake.

Now the owner of the property is liable under civil law for the deaths, though it does somewhat depend on who we're counting as owner (Kinzo's estate? Krauss? Yasu?) and how much they knew about it.

But criminally? There is no fault.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaisos Erranon

No, but it IS Kinzo's fault that the island exploded, and it IS Kinzo's fault that there was a reason to shoot anyone in the first place.

Hell, it's Kinzo's fault that his children are the kind of people who would shoot another person anyway.

See what I mean?

Not really. People are responsible for their own actions. I think it's fairly clear that people can rise above terrible circumstances; Maria, for all her turn toward darkness later in her life, never hurt anyone and was still able to trust people, and she had it bad. Ange is an obvious other example; although she can go bad, the "proper" ending shows she's not willing to pursue her paranoia and grief to self-destructive ends.

We don't know a lot of unbiased information about Kinzo's child-rearing or about the contribution his wife made to their upbringing. We also don't know that Eva, Krauss, or Rosa would go on a killing spree at all (Rudolf has more direct evidence of willingness to go along with it). It's too simple to point the finger at their father.

Finally, can you demonstrate beyond any shadow of a doubt that the mechanism which led to the disaster was Kinzo's agency and responsibility alone? He might be grossly irresponsible in not disarming whatever was there to disarm (if anything, and if he knew how and was able), but he might not be ultimately culpable for the outcome.

Now the owner of the property is liable under civil law for the deaths, though it does somewhat depend on who we're counting as owner (Kinzo's estate? Krauss? Yasu?) and how much they knew about it.

But criminally? There is no fault.

Look I can't really accept as an accident an explosion of that kind nor I can accept that there is no fault. There is something that is called "responsibility" to consider here. Even if Kinzo didn't want to use that bomb (which it isn't entirely true according to EP7) he's still responsible for creating that danger.

To make an example.
Let's say your neighbor packs several explosives in his house and makes it so that if someone tries to break inside they all go off. Now suppose that a burglar tries to go inside. He's not aware of the explosives so although he's clearly at wrong here, do you really think that he should be the one to be considered responsible for killing you? He might be a burglar but he's not a murderer. The real responsible is the complete idiot that set up those explosives near your house, don't you think?

In that case yes, but the circumstances are different; as you state in your example, the bombs are deliberately rigged to prevent a break-in. This sort of thing has a lot of precedent in US law (the famous case is of a guy who rigged up a gun to shoot anyone who tried to enter his trailer) and it is illegal, but that's different here.

If, in your example, someone accidentally armed the explosive, then no one is criminally responsible for the deaths caused unless they knew, should have known, or intentionally set the device. If it was a "mistake," then they probably didn't. Now if someone deliberately rigs it to blow, they're the ones criminally responsible for the resulting deaths.

Suppose, though, that Kinzo is alive and in a hospital on the mainland the day of the blast. When questioned, he admits he knew about the explosives and that they could blow up the mansion area but didn't do anything about it. Is Kinzo legally liable? You bet your ass.

EDIT: He might or might not also face criminal charges, but they wouldn't be murder.

He isn't just responsible for owning the explosives, he is responsible for setting up a complex system to make them all blow up with the clear purpose of destroying the mansion an killing off anyone who lives inside.

Even though he never actually did it, he still created the system that could allow him to do it at any given moment just by pressing a switch.

Since the previous example wasn't enough then let me change it to fit with the scenario even more.

Someone places a high amount explosive right under your house. and then connects it to a remote device. He could push the button at any given time. However in the end he doesn't do that. And yet, someone later, by accident, pushes the button and your house is gone.

There is no doubt that the one that pushes the button is by no mean accountable for what he did. But can you say that the whole thing was an accident or that no one is at fault here?

I'd say that the fact a huge amount of explosive was set to blow up your house is nowhere close to have happened by accident.

I totally call bullshit on it's validity. Note that it's being cut out of Clair's guts, and she passed on without regrets after Will understood the truth, but he never questioned the validity of Kinzo's story.

Now, excluding the Army Gold scene for a second, what do the rest of the scenes have in common?

They are memories of "Beatrice." BAD ones. If we're going to say that Kinzo's story is deluding himself into a good light despite Spectating Authority, then I propose that Clair, WHO HAS CONSISTENTLY PORTRAYED KINZO NEGATIVELY SINCE THE FIRST EPISODE, is projecting her own emotional judgements and perspective onto her memories.

The emo git is playing up the melodrama. She's not lying though; she honestly believes it.

I think Renall's just talking about things from a legal stand point. Specifically criminal culpability or civil liability.

You're talking about whether he's morally or ethically responsible, right? I don't think anyone would disagree that he was those two and is technically to share some of the blame. And also, possibly negligent and/or naive...

... wouldn't put it past Kinzo. *cough*

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

I'm just here because someone brought up the red guts scene:

I totally call bullshit on it's validity. Note that it's being cut out of Clair's guts, and she passed on without regrets after Will understood the truth, but he never questioned the validity of Kinzo's story.

That's an interesting take on Claire/Yasu's feelings. In other words, she probably has her own biased take on the events too.

As an aside to Judoh's question, about what use the Spectator's Authority was if it could be subverted by bias so easily... I thought that this was the final point of EP7. Basically, you were trolled into think that Spectator's Authority was... um... 'authoritative.' But the red guts scene ended up showing you that, (if we take what Aura said about Clair/Yasu's take on it all), hey, here's an alternate view to just mess you up! Nelson: "Haha." Basically, Spectator's Authority is the highest authority and it too is subverted in the end... so... how can anyone reach the truth?

Maybe because I ended up reading the Tea Party so close to starting EP8 but it ended up weighing very heavily while I read through the last episode.

We were never told at any point that the Spectator's Authority by any means was honest, immune to lies/bias what have you, or whatever. Infact, the only use it has seems to be delivering information otherwise impossible to report, like recalling memories from alternate worlds.

It's basically a device to break the fourth wall and do some Greek Chorus meta-meta shit. It's a literal break in the story so Will can pull them aside and squeeze info out of them he literally has no business knowing and they have no business telling. That's probably why it's so highly regulated and forbidden and shit. If it was just "Interviewing bitches with special visual aids"...well...what's so goddamn special about it?

I think Renall's just talking about things from a legal stand point. Specifically criminal culpability or civil liability.

You're talking about whether he's morally or ethically responsible, right? I don't think anyone would disagree that he was those two and is technically to share some of the blame. And also, possibly negligent and/or naive...

... wouldn't put it past Kinzo. *cough*

Then let's talk from a legal standpoint.

Suppose this case: there was a terrorist attack, a bomb exploded in a public area killing several people in the process. Two men are found being involved with this case. One man is responsible for acquiring the explosive, creating the bomb and the remote control, and placing the device on the site. The other man is responsible for pressing the trigger.

From a perfectly legal standpoint, do you think that only the man that actually pulled the trigger will be considered accountable for that massacre?